Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ezzie.
[B][COLOR="Black"]Thanks for that Gomme, I think i'll just go bang my head against a wall, or maybe you should be doing that?
I think it is my time, you've done it so much that sense doesn't appeal to you.
Quote:
Your whole "get facts from the uk" argument is complete ********: we all live on this world, if one country gives barely any global warming whereas the other countries give 100 times the amount, should we ignore it and say "it's their own problem"? Idiotic argument there...
Different countries report differemt statistics, therefore each country reports vary. We are talking about vegetarianism, not global warming. Get that into your thick skull and I will give you a biscuit. It is not idiotic in the least, you are merely saying that because you cannot pick out an argument in response "/
Quote:
Overprocessed as in comparitive to a nature hunt+kill aspect instead of born+raised for slaughter+meat. Thus more c02 given out into the atmosphere, you also state that "it's not in the u.k too"- it's the u.n giving out the report of all the countries- yes the united kingdom is a country- quit with this "if it's not from the u.k it's not fact stupidity", as I've said, I've given you many facts about how healthy vegetarianism is: the reason I gave you an american report (the leading american dietry association) is because I couldn't find an English report.:O Meat is meat.
Different countries process their meat in a different way with different feeds. Naturally, not all countries have the same type of feed because they come from different countries, and it is against international law to transport meat, nuts, chocolate etc to other countries because they harvest diseases/illnesses which are different to the native country, which is where Lycans. made up fact is very wrong. I am of the opinion you don't like Zoos. Because over processed meat in the UK is very regularly donated to Zoos and Sanctuaries which are then given to animals. Without this, Zoos would have to spend alot more money buying in the meat and this can be very costly to a zoo. Also, why are you arguing about global warming? It's happening anyway and you won't be alive for the "major effects" (statistically).
Quote:
Also where did I say I can't eat meat? I can eat meat if I want too o.O I chose not to eat meat and feel better doing so health wise and ethically.
You hint it regularly, saying it would be bad for your health making you drowsy.
"I have chronic fatigue syndrome/m.e= ate meat for 2 years of it and felt very bad."
So in context of "can't," eating meat would be like eating a very long term form of poison?
Quote:
You also keep saying i'm talking about cooking oils? I haven't once mentioned cooking oils, yet you keep mentioning it. I'm talking about the actual FAT and CHOLESTEROL in meat.
But there is very little FAT and CHOLESTEROL as I proved you wrong ages ago when I gave you facts and figures of Braised Beef Steak. 4% of your recommended intake of fat? That's not bad, but you seem to think it is. You also seem to be dodging my facts and claiming they are opinion. I must be good at making up facts :D Or you are pathetic and can't find an answer to it, which you have done.
Quote:
Why, when I give a valid argument you point out that it's "just in another country", we all live on this world together: deal with it Though I understand your point on different cultures, when you say we're nothing like America: It's pretty laughable.
In terms of eating habits and how food is processed, we're very different. If you bothered pointing out UK facts, maybe they would meaning something, but basing your knowledge outside the barriers of UK knowledge and facts are not a good grounds for knowledge.
Quote:
And , bless.. I knew you'd bring in teeth argument, we also have a brain you see, to make reasoning beyond what our teeth look like: you also know that our teeth are so odd that many people have to have dental correction to prevent problems in later life?
Our brain eats meat? Actually, that's a point. Meat is good for the mind as stated in one of the links I gave you. You seem to go off on a tangent and forget the centre premise. Our teeth strongly suggest we eat meat. Canines are for meat for example, but either a vegetarian clan which you believe in or you're in denial with the truth has led you to believe they're for vegetables. Cows, sheep etc all have molars and a few incisors. There is no biological basis that we shouldn't eat meat. We can and we will, end of. We can survive on a vegetarian diet, but we can also survive on a vegetable and meat diet, which you seem to over look and think I am talking about just eating meat "/
Quote:
Also where are our teeth "suggested" to eat meat? If you're talking about the canines, they're for grasping and tearing
Which exist in all animals, very clever. BUT, it is where the teeth are placed. Cows have 2 canines and 2 incisors at the very front, while we have 4 insicors and 2 canines, which scientists reckon are for gripping on to prey and then tearing in all animals that eat meat, while in cows for example, it is just to grab and pull on or grabbing and grinding off which you cannot do with meat, because the gripping canines are located further back, so you have to rip or chew to cut bits off, unless you do the wise thing and take small mouthfuls at a time.
Quote:
if you're talking about premolars then they're used for bursting and pressuring: such as fruit :o
And they can also be used for chewing meat :O
Quote:
You also say that we are designed to eat "more meat" yet you say you're an omnivore? ... *bangs head into wall*
You dor ealise you're an idiot for saying this. "More meat" does not mean ONLY. So I am still an omnivore, fool.
Quote:
Also I suggest you re-read my points as you keep putting words into my mouth: First you say I'm talking about how people cook their meat, secondly me saying meat is "full of fat" which if you re-read I said it wasn't "full of fat", plus I'd like to add you keep saying you're getting your facts from books and websites, care to link the websites, you know like I've done, it's easy to post a credible source and not actually posting the link..
So why make it easy to put words in your mouth? State texactly, not just partially. Maybe you would make a tad more sense, even with your mindless dribble on made-up facts that there is alot of fat in meat, when infact there is very little. As stated below:
http://www.txbeef.org/nutrition.php3#facts - Gives stats and figures on the amount of nutrition in meat.
I eat mainly sirloin and I believe it is the most popular type of beef? I'll have a look into it. It has very little fat and alot of nutrition in ranging from Zinc to Selenium.
And you hint meat is incredibly unhealthy, because you keep mentioning it has fat in. You agree that fat is good but then you go and disagree moments later. Make up your blooming mind please.
Quote:
Oh and not some random word processed website done by one person, an actual report made by a reputable scientific association/team, like the one I gave- coincidence? :O
Coincidence in what? And why would someone make up facts if they are not part of a scientific associated or team? Their facts could come from them, but if it pleases your muddled up head :rolleyes:
http://www.txbeef.org/nutrition.php3
- Lists the nutritional values in beef.
http://eatchicken.com/nutrition/nutrition.cfm
- Compares chicken to other meat. Beef being the "unhealthiest," which it isn't :rolleyes:
http://www.nutrition.org.uk/home.asp...hich=undefined
- I hope you are familiar with omega-3, which fish is at the top of the game with. If not, you're a fool to yourself.
http://www.hormel.com/templates/know...emid=31&id=160
- Pork in comparison with other meats.
http://www.weightwatchers.co.uk/util...1&art_id=22761
- Weight Watchers. Very popular weight loss associations.
And I stated a while ago, with a link, that the meat itself isn't at all fatty, but the fat in the meat is e.g. the white bits. Loads seem to cut this off, some keep it. With or without, it's not bad "/
And aload of websites talk about how Eskimos are healthy, living off meat along. Unless you suggest they grow beans outside and a few tomatoes?
Quote:
Your argument on "eating grass" is truly the sign of a desperate argument, grass has barely any nutrients, and also for a humans tooth, could damage it or even wear the tooth away- it's also hard to chew and also hard to digest, ; humans basically aren't designed to eat it: where as animals like deer/cows etc are designed to eat it as you don't really see them climbing up trees for fruits ;)
The grass argument is an example, idiot. Compare grass to celery, very little nutrients and hard to digest. Compare with sweet corn, the outside is not digested. Apple skins, bean skins, oranges are useless other than the juice and a few tenders parts. Also, when did I strongly suggest that grass is an example which sums up all vegetables? While with meat, any part of it is digestable, which is why it is a good source for certain types of nutrition (obviously vitamins and minerals found in vegetables won't be found in meat) and it is probably why nutritionists suggest why you shouldn't eat it.
Also, cows/deer can wait till the fruit falls to the ground ;) Your logic and examples are terrible.
Quote:
Second article just made me laugh, it was a study of a handful of people- also "amateurs", how long did the experiment last for exactly? Did they see a dietitian, a nutritionist? did they do more physical exercise (the women) than they were used too- note the word "amateur"? Sorry.. but it has little credibility..
So what if they are amateurs? The point still remains they could be active "9% longer" than the vegetarians? Stop trying to find a stupid reason to get out of the argument "/ It is obvious.
